in an ATA post. I specifically asked for clarification of the rules for Meta posts in GD. The question was not answered. I simply want to know what the rules are so I don't violate them. I don't think that is too much to ask.
Meta posts are common place, while an alerter indicated that my post about gendered language was not only Meta and therefore prohibited, but proved I deserved to be PPR'd. A number of hosts agreed that my thread should be locked. The thread wasn't locked, but I was a bit taken aback by the suggestion there was something grievous about Meta threads in the first place, given how we see dozens everyday. I don't know how people could vote to hide a thread based on Meta, while allowing dozens of others, with absolutely no sense that they were willfully imposing a double-standard. I don't know how it's possible not to think about such things, or perhaps it's simply that they don't care and truly believe a hosts position is to allow free reign to people or subjects they like and crack down on those they don't. I have no idea what people are thinking, but I find it bizarre. I do know that if I exercised a position of authority in that way, I couldn't look myself in the mirror.
We all have biases. That is part of the human condition. My approach while on MIRT was to try to make my biases explicit rather than to pretend I didn't have any. My doing so has since been used against me out in the regular forums, and those Meta statements I used repeated as some sort of indictment of me. Some people clearly see self-reflection as a sign of weakness that provides an opportunity to attack others and have no compunctions whatsoever about operating based on personal animus. Clearly I see it differently.